Articles Posted in Up Periscope

The ever excellent Federal Evidence Review has this nice summary and analysis of White v. Illinois.

While here they report:

Vacating cocaine distribution conviction and remanding because defendant’s trial included expert testimony by a witness about the contents of the drug identification analysis reported by a non-testifying expert, violating the Confrontation Clause; as the expert’s trial testimony "simply parroted the conclusion" of the non-testifying expert, the testifying expert’s "testimony amounted to no more than the prohibited transmission of testimonial hearsay," in United States v. Ramos-Gonzlez, __ F.3d __ (1st Cir. Dec. 9, 2011) (No. 10–1318).

Here is a link to Executive Order 13593, in the Federal Register, dated 13 December 2011, which amends the MCM.

The Army Court of Criminal Appeals issued a Memorandum Opinion on 9 December 2011, in the case of United States v. Perterson.  The opinion is worth reading for its discussion of prosecution over-reaching in aggravation witnesses, cross-examination of defense witnesses, and argument.  The defense did not object to the prosecution argument, but as the opinion notes, dealt with the argument in their own argument.  The court finds error with the trial counsel’s argument and the military judge’s response.  Here is the AOE (which was evaluated using a plain error analysis):

WHETHER IT WAS PLAIN ERROR WHEN TRIAL COUNSEL INFLAMED THE PASSIONS OF THE PANEL BY IMPLYING THAT CHILDREN ON ARMY INSTALLATIONS EVERYWHERE ARE IN DANGER OF BEING SEXUALLY ABUSED BY APPELLANT AND ARGUING THAT APPELLANT SHOULD BE PUNISHED FOR ACTUALLY HARMING CHILDREN.

In discussing the prosecutors role the court begins:

Navy Times has a tally of CO and senior enlisted firings for 2010 -  2011 to date.  #2 on the list is CO, RLSO, Japan.

Military.com has more on the firing and NJP of:  A Navy skipper who lost his command this summer was fired in part for making his Sailors work on a Sunday to help him host a family reunion at which he allowed his relatives to drive military vehicles and go for rides on a landing craft, according to a Navy investigation report.

Army Times reports:  The first female commandant of the Army’s school for drill sergeants at Fort Jackson, S.C., has been suspended from her position, according to an Army official.

White v. Illinois.

Argument transcript.

Professor Friedman.

Navy Times reports:  The commander of a deployed EA-6B Prowler squadron was fired late Thursday following an investigation into sexual harassment allegations, the Navy announced Friday.

(Interesting, perhaps to Navy folks, the XO was allowed to take temporary command.  Looking at the allegations and knowing the function of an XO in a Navy unit  — odd?).

Navy Times is also reporting:  The top sailor on the dock landing ship Fort McHenry was fired Friday over allegations of misconduct, Naval Surface Force Atlantic announced late Friday.

let this never happen to me.

Politico is reporting:  That 15 personnel were “disciplined” as a result of United States v. Manning.  This appears to be partly based on a McClatchy piece.

Wired reports that:  The government is seeking to block Bradley Manning’s attorney’s attempt to call nearly 50 defense witnesses at a pre-trial hearing next week over the private’s alleged leaking of hundreds of thousands of U.S. government documents[.]  Here’s a link to a response from the defense.

Stars & Stripes reports:  A Navy commander who was relieved in August has received a punitive letter of reprimand for misconduct as part of a nonjudicial punishment proceeding.

United States v. Goodman, Army.  4 (Stucky [W], Baker, Ryan, Effron), Dissent in part (Erdmann).  No error in failing to address possible affirmative defense in GP case, because there was nothing inconsistent.  Fosler remand (GP to indecent exposure and bigamy).

United States v.  Pierce, Army.  Certified case.  Ryan for a unanimous  court.  Computer crime case.  The issue being who decides if the internet is a “facility or means of interstate . . . commerce,” and the correctness of the instructions.  The military judge decides.

Here is an interesting piece from North County Times about the lawsuit involving Carolyn Martin.

Government admissions in the civil rights trial of a Southern California woman suing the Naval Criminal Investigative Service for harassment have sparked questions over whether the law enforcement agency overstepped its authority and engaged in domestic spying.

CAAFLog has posted and commented on this case previously.